We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Pak for Data and Oracle Integration Cloud Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Virtualization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of IBM Cloud Pak for Data are the Watson Studio, where we can initiate more groups and write code. Additionally, Watson Machine Learning is available with many other services, such as APIs which you can plug the machine learning models."
"The most valuable features are data virtualization and reporting."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is the Modeler flows. The ability to develop models using a graphical approach and the capability to connect to various sources, as well as the data virtualization capabilities, allow me to easily access and utilize data that is dispersed across different sources."
"Its data preparation capabilities are highly valuable."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten."
"Cloud Pak's most valuable features are IBM MQ, IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, and ISPF."
"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."
"What I found most helpful in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is containerization, which means it's easy to shift and leave in terms of moving to other clouds. That's an advantage of IBM Cloud Pak for Data."
"The initial setup is easy."
"In general, there were a lot of great utilities for working with files."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Provides various ways to secure services as well as providing extensive support."
"Oracle Integration Cloud Service offers a lot of adaptors."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the SFTP adapters, file adapters, and risk adapters, that we use in everyday projects."
"The solution is scalable."
"The Oracle integration tool is the most comfortable tool for using those Oracle products."
"The tool depends on the control plane, an OpenShift container platform utilized as an orchestration layer...So, we have communicated this issue to IBM and asked if it is feasible to adapt the solution to work on a Kubernetes platform that we support."
"One thing that bugs me is how much infrastructure Cloud Pak requires for the initial deployment. It doesn't allow you to start small. The smallest permitted deployment is too big. It's a huge problem that prevents us from implementing the solution in many scenarios."
"There is a solution that is part of IBM Cloud Pak for Data called Watson OpenScale. It is used to monitor the deployed models for the quality and fairness of the results. This is one area that needs a lot of improvement."
"The technical support could be a little better."
"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."
"The product is trying to be more maturity in terms of connectors. That, I believe, is an area where Cloud Pak can improve."
"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."
"The solution's user experience is an area that has room for improvement."
"We would love to have more and more ready-to-use interfaces from Oracle."
"The support and resources were lacking — they weren't there."
"Configurable timeouts on each connection would be good."
"The bulk processing needs improvement."
"Lacks features for more complex integrations."
"Now the platform is not built in a way that you can define."
"The logging capabilities could be enhanced. Currently, logs are only retained for a few days, which can be inconvenient for administrators. Ideally, we'd like the option to configure log retention periods, like a month or fifteen days, instead of the current one-week limit."
"They need to make tools framework available for implementation partners"
More Oracle Integration Cloud Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Cloud Pak for Data is ranked 3rd in Data Virtualization with 11 reviews while Oracle Integration Cloud Service is ranked 3rd in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) with 32 reviews. IBM Cloud Pak for Data is rated 8.0, while Oracle Integration Cloud Service is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Data writes "A scalable data analytics and digital transformation tool that provides useful features and integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Integration Cloud Service writes "An integration tool that is highly compatible and easy to maintain". IBM Cloud Pak for Data is most compared with IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Azure Data Factory, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and Palantir Foundry, whereas Oracle Integration Cloud Service is most compared with Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), AWS Glue, Mule Anypoint Platform, Oracle GoldenGate and Azure Data Factory. See our IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs. Oracle Integration Cloud Service report.
We monitor all Data Virtualization reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.